IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fis/journl/260212.html

Institutional Decoupling in Emerging Markets: The Audit Paradox and Digitalisation Gap in Turkish Cooperatives

Author

Listed:
  • KürÅŸat TAÅžTAN

Abstract

This study examines institutional decoupling in Turkish cooperative governance by focusing on the gap between the formal alignment of cooperative legislation with global governance principles and functional shortcomings in practice. Using qualitative document analysis, it compares national legislation and recent policy documents (including the Türkiye Cooperativism Strategy and Action Plan (2025–2029) and the Specialised Commission Report) with international standards (ICA principles and ILO Recommendation No. 193). Findings indicate substantial de jure convergence consistent with isomorphic pressures in New Institutional Theory, yet persistent de facto deviation in auditing and digitalisation mechanisms. This macro–micro paradox is also visible in international benchmarks. Although Türkiye ranks 17th globally by nominal GDP, no cooperative appears in the WCM Top 300 by absolute turnover, and only one (Trakya Birlik, rank 272) is listed in the turnover/GDP per capita ranking. From an Agency Theory perspective, member-elected internal audit bodies often lack professional competence, weakening oversight and accountability—an “audit paradox†—while slow digitalisation (e.g., KOOPBİS) and bureaucratic fragmentation reinforce a “digitalisation gap.†The article argues that Türkiye’s cooperative potential requires governance reform that professionalises auditing while preserving democratic participation and consolidates the fragmented framework into a coherent, digitally supported oversight regime.

Suggested Citation

  • KürÅŸat TAÅžTAN, 2026. "Institutional Decoupling in Emerging Markets: The Audit Paradox and Digitalisation Gap in Turkish Cooperatives," Fiscaoeconomia, Tubitak Ulakbim JournalPark (Dergipark), issue 2.
  • Handle: RePEc:fis:journl:260212
    DOI: 10.25295/fsecon.1861272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/5593128
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.25295/fsecon.1861272?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    2. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Agency Problems and Residual Claims," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 327-349, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tarek Roshdy Gebba & Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged, 2016. "Corporate Governance of UAE Financial Institutions: A Comparative Study between Conventional and Islamic Banks," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 6(5), pages 1-7.
    2. Evans, Lewis & Meade, Richard, 2005. "The Role and Significance of Cooperatives in New Zealand Agriculture, A Comparative Institutional Analysis," Working Paper Series 3847, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    3. Seog S. Hun, 2006. "Limited Competition, Information Asymmetry, and Organizational Forms," Asia-Pacific Journal of Risk and Insurance, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 1-14, February.
    4. Isabelle Le Breton–Miller & Danny Miller, 2006. "Why Do Some Family Businesses Out–Compete? Governance, Long–Term Orientations, and Sustainable Capability," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 30(6), pages 731-746, November.
    5. Steen Thomsen & Caspar Rose, 2004. "Foundation Ownership and Financial Performance: Do Companies Need Owners?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 343-364, December.
    6. Hubert Tchakoute Tchuigoua, 2011. "Contrat de crédit, décentralisation décisionnelle et performance des institutions de microfinance," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 14(2), pages 143-173, June.
    7. Wiwattanakantang, Yupana, 1999. "An empirical study on the determinants of the capital structure of Thai firms," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 7(3-4), pages 371-403, August.
    8. Paul Gompers & Joy Ishii & Andrew Metrick, 2003. "Corporate Governance and Equity Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 107-156.
    9. Marco Zanobio, 2012. "Aspetti teorici della Corporate Governance," DISEIS - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo dis1202, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo (DISEIS).
    10. Agarwal, Vikas & Daniel, Naveen D. & Naik, Narayan Y., 2009. "Role of managerial incentives and discretion in hedge fund performance," CFR Working Papers 04-04, University of Cologne, Centre for Financial Research (CFR).
    11. Gordon, Roger H. & MacKie-Mason, Jeffrey K., 1994. "Tax distortions to the choice of organizational form," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 279-306, October.
    12. Corten, Maarten & Steijvers, Tensie & Lybaert, Nadine, 2017. "The effect of intrafamily agency conflicts on audit demand in private family firms: The moderating role of the board of directors," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 13-28.
    13. Ayadi, Mohamed A. & Kryzanowski, Lawrence & Mohebshahedin, Mahmood, 2018. "Impact of sponsorship on fixed-income fund performance," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 121-137.
    14. Noel O'Sullivan, 2005. "Why do executives serve as non-executives? Pre-Cadbury evidence from UK non-financial companies," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 161-176.
    15. Vontalge, Alan L., 1991. "A feasibility study of swine producer management cooperatives," ISU General Staff Papers 1991010108000018168, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Guidi, Marco G.D. & Hillier, Joe & Tarbert, Heather, 2010. "Successfully reshaping the ownership relationship by reducing ‘moral debt’ and justly distributing residual claims: The cases from Scott Bader Commonwealth and the John Lewis Partnership," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 318-328.
    17. Arrunada, Benito & Paz-Ares, Candido, 1997. "Mandatory rotation of company auditors: A critical examination," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 31-61, March.
    18. van Lent, L.A.G.M., 1996. "The Economics of an Audit Frm : The Case of KPMG in the Netherlands," Other publications TiSEM 415a66c3-7ad4-439e-9c37-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. David Gindis, 0. "On the origins, meaning and influence of Jensen and Meckling’s definition of the firm," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(4), pages 966-984.
    20. Emmanuel Mensah & Christopher Boachie, 2023. "Corporate governance mechanisms and earnings management: The moderating role of female directors," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 2167290-216, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fis:journl:260212. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emre Atsan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://dergipark.org.tr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.